Diplomacy in the Context of Political Science, International Relations and Strategic Studies

2021 ◽  
pp. 15-37
Author(s):  
Sandra Rodrigues Balão ◽  
Teresa de Almeida e Silva
1985 ◽  
Vol 44 ◽  
pp. 4-5
Author(s):  
Michael Goldstein

During the fall 1983 semester, I experimented with a terrorism simulation that seemed to engage student interest and heighten their awareness about the nature of terrorism.I used the simulation in Political Science 221 — Introduction to International Relations. There were two sections of this course, which met three hours weekly for approximately 15 weeks. About half the students were political science majors; most were freshmen and sophomores. For purposes of conducting the simulation, however, it makes little difference what year students are in or what majors they follow. With the exception of a two-week unit on terrorism, the course devoted about one week to each of the standard topics normally studied by students in international relations.


1995 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 40
Author(s):  
Kirk Beattie

When Capitalists Collide: Business Conflict and the End of Empire in Egypt. By Robert Vitalis. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1995. 282 pp. Reviewed by Kirk Beattie, Department of Political Science and International Relations, Simmons College, Boston, MA.


2015 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 681-711 ◽  
Author(s):  
NICOLAS GUILHOT

In the disciplines of political science and international relations, Machiavelli is unanimously considered to be “the first modern realist.” This essay argues that the idea of a realist tradition going from the Renaissance to postwar realism founders when one considers the disrepute of Machiavelli among early international relations theorists. It suggests that the transformation of Machiavelli into a realist thinker took place subsequently, when new historical scholarship, informed by strategic and political considerations related to the transformation of the US into a global power, generated a new picture of the Renaissance. Focusing on the work of Felix Gilbert, and in particular hisMachiavelli and Guicciardini, the essay shows how this new interpretation of Machiavelli was shaped by the crisis of the 1930s, the emergence of security studies, and the philanthropic sponsorship of international relations theory.


2014 ◽  
Vol 47 (02) ◽  
pp. 468-476 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erin R. Graham ◽  
Charles R. Shipan ◽  
Craig Volden

ABSTRACTWhat factors inhibit or facilitate cross-subfield conversations in political science? This article draws on diffusion scholarship to gain insight into cross-subfield communication. Diffusion scholarship represents a case where such communication might be expected, given that similar diffusion processes are analyzed in American politics, comparative politics, and international relations. We identify nearly 800 journal articles published on diffusion within political science between 1958 and 2008. Using network analysis we investigate the degree to which three “common culprits”—terminology, methodological approach, and journal type—influence levels of integration. We find the highest levels of integration among scholars using similar terms to describe diffusion processes, sharing a methodological approach (especially in quantitative scholarship), and publishing in a common set of subfield journals. These findings shed light on when cross-subfield communication is likely to occur with ease and when barriers may prove prohibitive.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document